盜版與有限負債

以作者查詢圖書館館藏

、以作者查詢臺灣博碩士

、以作者查詢全國書目

、勘誤回報

、線上人數：55

、訪客IP：3.135.212.157

姓名

林秋芬(Chiu-fen Lin) 查詢紙本館藏

畢業系所

產業經濟研究所

論文名稱

盜版與有限負債
(Piracy and Limited Liability)

相關論文

★ 中小學教科書市場區位競爭之研究	★ 從電子商務演進-探討銀行電子金融服務創新
★ 智慧型手機產業分析	★ 台灣金融控股公司之產業分析
★ 中國銀行產業分析—兼論台資銀行西進策略	★ 財富管理業務之探討─以花旗銀行及合作金庫商業銀行為例
★ 數位相機產業市場結構、行為與績效之研究	★ 探討台灣智慧型手機產業之競爭策略
★ 太陽光電產業分析	★ 企業危機處理策略之探討─以台灣非酒精飲料業為例
★ 台灣航空市場產業分析與營運績效研究	★ LED照明產業市場分析
★ 以軟硬整合思維重新探討智慧型手機商業模式	★ 由社會開放的角度看巨量資料興起-兼論垂直分
★ 印刷電路板產業市場分析與營運績效之研究	★ 台灣地區機車製造業產業分析及營運績效之研究

檔案

[Endnote RIS 格式]

[Bibtex 格式]

[相關文章]

[文章引用]

[完整記錄]

[館藏目錄]

[檢視]

[下載]

本電子論文使用權限為同意立即開放。
已達開放權限電子全文僅授權使用者為學術研究之目的，進行個人非營利性質之檢索、閱讀、列印。
請遵守中華民國著作權法之相關規定，切勿任意重製、散佈、改作、轉貼、播送，以免觸法。

摘要(中)

這篇文章主要分析有網路外部性的的情況下，獨佔軟體廠商面對終端使用者盜版(end-user piracy)所受到的影響。假設消費者之間有所得差異及「有限負債(limited liability)」條件。其中「有限負債」會使消費者的盜版成本隨所得增加，因此獨佔廠商可以去利用低所得消費者所帶來網路效果，轉而對高所得消費者定高價以獲得高利潤，尤其是當廠商能有效防止高所得消費者得到網路效果外溢時。當智慧財產權政策趨於愈嚴格執行，則獨佔廠商愈能避免這效果外溢，否則情況會變成每一高所得消費者都獲利，唯獨廠商受害。這是因為邊際消費者受到「有限負債」保護，提高罰金對這些人的均衡狀態絲毫無作用。
關於軟體價格與廠商利潤，一如預期地，這兩個均衡會隨罰金大小或盜版被抓到的機率增加而增加。相反地，由於存在網路效果，上述均衡隨取得盜版成本增加而減少。另外，關於盜版軟體數量，如所預期般，會隨取得盜版成本增加而減少，但出乎意料地，它會隨罰金增加而增加。這是因為提高罰金會促使獨佔廠商更進一步提高軟體價格。同樣的，除非被抓到盜版的機率很高，否則盜版數量會隨這機率增加而增加。另外，如果政策工具執行嚴格，而且政府改將收到的罰金移轉給軟體廠商作為利潤損失的補償，如果目前軟體價格已經很高則這些政策並不會改變任何結果；反之，軟體價格會被更進一步提高。

摘要(英)

This paper analyzes the effects of end-user piracy on a monopolized software industry with network effects in which consumers have heterogeneous income and limited liability. Limited liability produces a piracy cost which increases with income. The monopolist thus may be able to exploit the network effect brought about by the piracy of low-income consumers to charge a higher price to high-income consumers thereby earn a higher profit, especially when the monopolist can prevent the network effect from spilling over to the high-income consumers. If intellectual property rights policies are severe enough, then the monopolist can avoid the spillover. Otherwise it may become a case where each high-income buyer benefits from the piracy but the monopolist is hurt. Because the marginal consumer is protected by limited liability, raising the size of the penalty may not have an effect on the equilibrium at all.
As expected, the price and the profit always (weakly) increase with either the size of penalty or the detection probability. In contrast, due to the network effect, they may decrease with the cost of obtaining an illegal copy. As expected, the pirated quantity (weakly) decreases with the cost of obtaining an illegal copy. But the pirated quantity always (weakly) increases with the size of the penalty. This is because raising the size of penalty invites the monopolist to raise the price. The pirated quantity similarly increases with the detection probability except when the detection probability is higher than a critical level. If policy instruments are severe enough, giving the penalties to the monopolist instead of the government does not cause any changes because the price is already at its highest possible value; otherwise, the price may be raised.

關鍵字(中)

★ 盜版
★ 有限負債
★ 所得分配

關鍵字(英)

★ piracy
★ limited liability
★ income distribution

論文目次

摘要 i
Abstract ii
誌謝 iii
Content iv
Figure content iv
1 Introduction 1
1.1 Reality of software piracy 1
1.2 Types of software piracy 2
1.3 Protection of intellectual property 4
1.4 Literature Review 5
2 The Model and the demand function 10
2.1 The utility function 10
2.2 Location of the profit-maximizing price 11
2.3 How consumers choose among the three alternatives 13
2.4 The demand function 17
3 The Equilibrium 18
4 Comparative Statics and Welfare Analysis 22
4.1 Intellectual property rights protection 22
4.2 Welfare analysis 24
4.3 The profit-maximizing detection probability 26
4.4 The comparative statics regarding the cost of obtaining an illegal copy 27
5 Civil Remedies 28
6 Conclusions 31
References 33
Appendix A: Copyright laws 35
The Mathematical Appendix B 40
Figure content
Figure 2.1 16
Figure 3.1 18

參考文獻

Alary, D. and C. Gollier, (2004), “Debt Contract, Strategic Default, and Optimal Penal-ties with Judgement Errors.” Annals of Economics and Finance, 5, 357-72.
Andrés, A. R. (2006), “Software Piracy and Income Inequality.” Applied Economics Letters, 13, 101–5.
Bae, S. H. and J. P. Choi (2006), “A Model of Piracy.” Information Economics and Pol-icy, 18, 303-20.
Bain, J. (1956), Barriers to New Competition, Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
Banerjee, D. S. (2003), “Software Piracy: A Strategic Analysis and Policy Instruments.” International Journal of Industrial Organization, 21, 97-127.
Banerjee, D. S. (2006), “Lobbying and Commercial Software Piracy.” European Jour-nal of Political Economy, 22, 139-55.
Belleflamme, P. (2003), “Pricing Information Goods in the Presence of Copying.” In: The Economics of Copyright: Development in Research and Analysis, Edited by Gordon, W. J. and Watt, R. Edward Elgar.
Bensen, S. M. and S. N. Kirby (1989), “Private Copying, Appropriablity, and Optimal Copying Royalties.” Journal of Law and Economics, 32, 255-80.
Blank, R. M. (1994), “Outlook for the U.S. Labor Market and Prospects for Low-Wage Entry.” In: The Work Alternative: Welfare Reform and the Realities of the Job Market, Edited by Nightingale, D. S. and Haveman, R. H., Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute Press.
Business Software Alliance (BSA) (2006), Third Annual BSA and IDC Global Software Piracy Study, Washington, DC: US.
Chen, Y. and I. Png (2003), “Information Goods Pricing and Copyright Enforcement: Welfare Analysis.” Information System Research, 14, 107-23.
Conner, K. and R. Rumelt (1991), “Software Piracy: An Analysis of Protection Strate-gies.” Management Science, 37, 125-39.
Chang, M. C., C. F. Lin, and D. Wu (2007), “Software Piracy, Limited Liability and Network Effect.”, Mimeo, Graduate Institute of Industrial Economics, National Central University, Taiwan.
Dybas, J. A. (2007), “Application of NCSC Courtools ‘Measure Seven’ -Collection of Monetary Penalties,” Administrative Office of Courts, Phoenix, Arizona.
Easton, T. (2006), “Metropolitan Wage Levels of Less-Educated Workers: 1986 to 1999.” Industrial Relations, 45, 119-46.
Fisher, J. D. (2005), “The Effect of Unemployment Benefits, Welfare Benefits, and Other Income on Personal Bankruptcy.” Contemporary Economic Policy, 23,, 483-92.
Gopal, R. D. and G. L. Sanders (2000), “Global Software Piracy: You Can’t Get Blood Out of a Turnip.” Communications of the ACM, 43, 83-9.
Harbaugh, R. and R. Khemka (2001), “Does Copyright Enforcement Encourage Pi-racy?” Claremont Colleges Working Paper.
Holm, H. J. (2003), “Can Economic Theory Explain Piracy Behavior.” Topics in Eco-nomic Analysis & Policy, 3, Article 5.
Hoynes, H. W., M. E. Page, and A. H. Stevens (2006), “Poverty in America: Trends and Explanations.” Journal of Economic Perspectives, 20, 47-68.
Husted B. W. (2000), “The Impact of National Culture on Software Piracy.” Journal of Business Ethics, 26, 197-211.
Kim, B. and H. Schlesinger (2005), “Adverse Selection in an Insurance Market with Government-Guaranteed Subsistence Levels.” The Journal of Risk and Insurance, 72, 61-75.
Li, W. and P. D. Sarte (2006), “U.S. Consumer Bankruptcy Choice: The Importance of General Equilibrium Effects.” Journal of Monetary Economics, 53, 613–31.
Malik, A. S. (1990), “Avoidance, Screening and Optimal Enforcement.” Rand Journal of Economics, 21, 341-53.
Marron, D. B. and D. G.. Steel (2000) , “Which Countries Protect Intellectual Property? The Case of Software Piracy.” Economic Inquiry, 38, 159-74.
Motivans, M. (2004), “Intellectual Property Theft, 2002.” Bureau of Justice Statistics
Special Report, U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Justice Statistics Program.
Mussa, M. and S. Rosen (1978), “Monopoly and Product Quality.” Journal of Economic Theory, 18, 301-17.
Novos, I. E. and M. Waldman (1984), “The Effects of Increased Copyright Protection: An Analytic Approach.” Journal of Political Economy, 92, 236-46.
Peitz, M. and P. Waelbroeck (2006a), “Piracy of Digital Products: A Critical Review of the Theoretical Literature.” Information Economics and Policy, 18, 449-76.
Peitz, M. and P. Waelbroeck (2006b), “Why the Music Industry May Gain from Free Downloading — The Role of Sampling.” International Journal of Industrial Or-ganization, 24, 907-13.
Phukan, S. and G. Dhillon (2000), “Ethics and Information Technology Use: a Survey of US Based SMEs.” Information Management & Computer Security, 8, 239-43.
Polinsky, A. M. (2006), “Optimal Fines and Auditing When Wealth is Costly to Ob-serve.” International Review of Law and Economics, 26, 323-35.
Slive, J. and D. Bernhardt (1998), “Pirated for Profit.” Canadian Journal of Economics, 31, 886-99.
Shin, S. K., R. D. Gopal, G. L.Sanders, and A. B. Whinston (2004), “Global Software Piracy Revisited.” Communication of the ACM, 47, 103-7.
Shy, O. and J. Thisse (1999) , “A Strategic Approach to Software Protection.” Journal of Economics and Management Strategy, 8, 163-90.
Shy, O. (2001), The Economics of Network Industries, Cambridge University Press.
Smith, E. and R. Wright, (1992), “Why is Automobile Insurance in Philadelphia so Damn Expensive?” The American Economic Review, 82, 756-72.
Takeyama, L. (1994), “The Welfare Implications of Unauthorized Reproduction of In-tellectual Property in the Presence of Demand Network Externalities.” Journal of Industrial Economics, 42, 155-66.
Tirole, J. (1988), The Theory of Industrial Organization, Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.
Traphagan, M. and A. Griffith (1998), “Software Piracy and Global Competitiveness:
Report on Global Software Piracy.” International Review of Law, Computers and Technology, 12, 431-45.
Ueng, K. L. and C. C. Yang (2006), “Tax Evasion and Limited Liability.” Journal of Public Economic Theory, 8, 453-63.
US Census Bureau (2006), The 2006 Statistics Abstract of United States, Available at http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/information_communications/.
US Department of the Treasury (2006), Internal Revenue Service (IRS) 2005 Annual Report, Washington, DC.
White, M. J. (1998), “Why Don't More Households File for Bankruptcy?” The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, 14, 205-31.
Yoon, K. (2002), “The Optimal Level of Copyright Protection.” Information Economics and Policy, 14, 327-48.

指導教授

張明宗、吳大任
(Ming-chung Chang、Dachrahn Wu)

審核日期

2008-7-3

推文